www.nasa.gov down

[Mr Shifty]

The shuttle should have been retired decades ago. It wasn't that great of a spacecraft after all.

Sigh. Why does this meme keep getting propagated? The shuttle was a fantastic achievement; a truly spectacular LEO spacecraft. It was expensive and plagued with programmatic safety issues, but had capabilities that have never been duplicated:

• The shuttle orbiters were the first and -- with the exception of one uncrewed Buran flight -- only reusable orbital spacecraft.
  
• Shuttles could lift more into orbit than the heaviest of the currently available crop of expendable lift vehicles.
  
• There were typically seven crewmembers on a shuttle flight, with the capability to fly ten if necessary. No other launched spacecraft has been able to carry more than 3.
  
• It launched a total of 805 astronauts into orbit on 130 total orbital missions over its 3 decades of operation. No other spacecraft comes even close. Soyuz, by contrast, has launched 301 cosmonauts and astronauts into orbit over 119 missions during its 50 year history.
  
• The shuttle could do on orbit repair and recovery of satellites. There is no other spacecraft that has ever had this ability.
  
• Over half of all of the payload weight ever delivered to space was delivered by the shuttle.
  

[Justy]

the earth's gravitational field isn't going to change because the US government shut down

And no, vital employees are basically those responsible for national security and little else.

Border guards (skeleton crews), embassies, some counter terrorist and law enforcement activities, air traffic controllers, and that's about it.

My concern for Juno was that they might have needed to do some tracking & fine tuning to make sure it ends up outbound on the right course. In a post above, I quoted someone actually working on Juno who says they're still on the job monitoring spacecraft operations.

Border services are by no means "skeleton crews;" so far, they're pretty much unaffected. Heck, there's only 5 minute lineups both directions at the four crossings between Vancouver BC & Seattle this morning. Only 14% of the Dept of Homeland Security is furloughed and they're mostly in law enforcement training and FEMA non-disaster services.

Too bad we won't be able to see it pass by (unless you live in South Africa), but it's very exciting that it's passing this way again after two years orbiting out past Mars hurtling past the Cape of Good Hope at 33,300 mph on its way to Jupiter.

I wonder. On one hand, the closest approach will be nearly 600km up, and in the Earth's shadow. But it's got a massive 650 square feet of solar panels -- that's a bigger cross-section than the European ATV cargo ship, and I saw that with the naked eye -- and maybe it'll still be far enough of the horizon before crossing into shadow to be seen from Cape Town. I hope someone gets to see it.

[rkman]

Not shut down as in "no more NASA", however:

http://www.universetoday.com/105143/what-does-the-government-shutdown-mean-for-nasa/#ixzz2ga83liFa

“NASA will shut down almost entirely,†said President Barack Obama in a speech late Monday.

Around 97% of NASA’s 18,000 employees are off the job.

The 3% of NASA employees who are deemed essential will work without pay until the situation is resolved.

A forthcoming NASA launch to Mars could be in danger of losing its launch window should a shutdown in the United States federal government that began today (Oct. 1) continue for a while.

A whole bunch of programs continue until their funds run out in about a week.

[lajoswinkler]

I think this is appropriate here.

http://9gag.com/gag/azbXQBZ

the earth's gravitational field isn't going to change because the US government shut down

And no, vital employees are basically those responsible for national security and little else.

Border guards (skeleton crews), embassies, some counter terrorist and law enforcement activities, air traffic controllers, and that's about it.

I meant to ask "what about doctors" but then I remembered it's USA.

Edited October 2, 2013 by lajoswinkler

[Rage097]

The shuttle should have been retired decades ago. It wasn't that great of a spacecraft after all.

*facepalm* It has yet to have its acheivements replicated.

also...IT'S REUSABLE. Rockets are not reusable to the degree the space shuttle was. The space shuttle was a feat, and this annoying meme is way too common.

[Klingon Admiral]

The shuttle orbiters were the first and -- with the exception of one uncrewed Buran flight -- only reusable orbital spacecraft.

[*]Shuttles could lift more into orbit than the heaviest of the currently available crop of expendable lift vehicles.

[*]There were typically seven crewmembers on a shuttle flight, with the capability to fly ten if necessary. No other launched spacecraft has been able to carry more than 3.

[*]It launched a total of 805 astronauts into orbit on 130 total orbital missions over its 3 decades of operation. No other spacecraft comes even close. Soyuz, by contrast, has launched 301 cosmonauts and astronauts into orbit over 119 missions during its 50 year history.

[*]The shuttle could do on orbit repair and recovery of satellites. There is no other spacecraft that has ever had this ability.

[*]Over half of all of the payload weight ever delivered to space was delivered by the shuttle.

And to which end? There was no practical reason for the reusability, the shuttle was extremely expensive (450m $/launch + ~500,000 $ for every time the fuel had to be pumped out of the external tank + the constant maintenance costs). For about the same cost, the world could launch 2 Soyuz + a Ariane V (or a comperable launcher) into space, which would allow for about the same payload + astronauts (ok, one less) into orbit. Additionally, without the orbiter, the space shuttle launch system could lift so much more into orbit (aka SLS, which is the space shuttle without the space shuttle).

Then there is the issue of the space shuttle absolutely failing it's intended function, providing a steady, cheap launch solution. With, on average, far less than one launch a month and a launch cost that would, for cargo, make the Saturn V more cost efficient (~1.2b $ for 120 tons to LEO). Expendable launch systems have the additional advantage that they do not need constant maintenance. Furthermore, the shuttle was, technologically, little more than a rustbucket, NASA had to aquire old processors per eBay and cannibalizing outdated medical equipment as it was cheaper than upgrading the shuttle to modern hardware. A "simple" capsule, by contrast, should be relatively easy to upgrade. And I hope that whoever decided to not equip the shuttle with some sort of LES and the guy who dismissed the debris strike during the Columbia launch as nothing to worry about where fired. Apparently some people at NASA had not the mindset to properly operate a program like the STS. Especially the whole Columbia affair could have "relatively" easily become an crowning moment of awesome for the shuttle program (and space exploration as a whole) instead of the disaster which happened.

[Pawelk198604]

Just today I wanted to go to the website NASA, and nothing.

Does the U.S. government really went bankrupt?

[Anton P. Nym]

*facepalm* It has yet to have its acheivements replicated.

also...IT'S REUSABLE. Rockets are not reusable to the degree the space shuttle was.

It was reusable, but only after a nose-to-tail refurbishment. What was gained by returning the craft to service was lost by the enormous cost of the man-hours needed to do so; this is also why a four-shuttle fleet was unable to reach the launch rate that NASA determined would make the program break even.

The space shuttle was a feat, and this annoying meme is way too common.

The shuttle was a remarkable engineering feat, yes, but alas it really didn't do so well as a means for making access to space routine or cheap. I can't help but think that going with an assembly-line process to make large numbers of disposable boosters would've gone further to achieving the aims of the shuttle program.

-- Steve

[magnemoe]

*facepalm* It has yet to have its acheivements replicated.

also...IT'S REUSABLE. Rockets are not reusable to the degree the space shuttle was. The space shuttle was a feat, and this annoying meme is way too common.

Yes the shuttle was able to do stuff no existing spacecraft can as it had the manipulator arm and lots of other features, it was also able to return significant payloads to earth.

The reusable part on the other hand was an flop, it was far more expensive than normal single use rockets for getting cargo out in orbit.

Two reasons for this, first the orbiter was very heavy you needed an 80 ton to LEO launch system to get 25 ton to LEO, only benefit was that the shuttle itself was reusable.

However to make it work the shuttle was very highly stressed during an trip so it required a lot of maintenance between trips, this cost a lot of money and reducing the number of trips each shuttle could take, fewer launches also increased the cost for each launch until it was so high it was far more expensive than standard rockets.

Now an perfect design would be an far smaller shuttle for doing the shuttle stuff and an heavy launcher for lifting cargo, sharing a lot of parts.

Problem is that few thought of the idea of using the main engines to land the first stage like grasshopper. Yes you have DC-X however an SSTO is an no go with known rocket engines. the sable engine is not an pure rocket engine so might be possible, however an rocket powered SSTO would end up as an far worse hangar queen than then shuttle if you manage to build one.

[DaveofDefeat]

Just today I wanted to go to the website NASA, and nothing.

Does the U.S. government really went bankrupt?

The government is not bankrupt they just cant figure out what to spend money on, so they are not spending any money.

[DaRocketCat]

Just today I wanted to go to the website NASA, and nothing.

Does the U.S. government really went bankrupt?

No, that would be mean default, which would be catastrophic.

This is mildly pissing me off.

How come other federal sites, say the http://www.bls.gov/, are still operational, just not being updated, while nasa.gov is completely shut down?

[Klingon Admiral]

The government is not bankrupt they just cant figure out what to spend money on, so they are not spending any money.

Am I the only one who wonders which human being could design such an idiotic system?

[Kryten]

Am I the only one who wonders which human being could design such an idiotic system?

If you mean the system by which a small faction of one house of representatives can shut down the entire government without any means to e.g. promptly dismiss them, the human beings are the ones generally referred to as the 'founding fathers'.

[Guest]

Is it ok to talk politics now? I've got a rant all lined up and ready to go. As far as the money is concerned, I heard a little known but very bright talk show host named Rolleye James explain it in terms that I could understand. Many of the "baby boomer" generation are now retired. She said our financial problems come down to demographics. There are more people drawing out of the system than there are paying in. It's broken and there are no easy solutions. That's why the politicians keep putting it off with budget extensions instead of actual budgets, leading to the problems we are seeing now.

[OdinYggd]

No, actual politics talk is still not acceptable.

I'm honestly not sure why the system got to be this way. Somehow I don't think the founding fathers intended for it to be distorted in the manner it has, and we had plenty of warning not to trust a party system in politics- despite immeadiately forming them after George Washington.

Edited October 2, 2013 by OdinYggd

[DaveofDefeat]

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

-John Adams

[Guest]

I want to say thank you to the moderators for letting this discussion continue. IMO, the KSP forums are attracting some of the smartest young folks in the world. We are facing some tough problems, not just in the U.S., but worldwide. Someone is going to have to make some tough decisions soon, and I would much rather see the folks here involved in those decisions, rather than greedy lifetime politicians, or third world dictators. Education and honest opinions are sorely needed.

[lajoswinkler]

Am I the only one who wonders which human being could design such an idiotic system?

No, you are not the only one. Before this got on Yahoo News, I had no idea it actually exists. It's absurd and I don't remember it happening with any country ever. Maybe it's because I'm uninformed, I don't know.

[Skyrunner27]

No, actual politics talk is still not acceptable.

I'm honestly not sure why the system got to be this way. Somehow I don't think the founding fathers intended for it to be distorted in the manner it has, and we had plenty of warning not to trust a party system in politics- despite immeadiately forming them after George Washington.

On a recent trip to Independence Hall in Philadelphia I learned that Congress was actually designed to have gridlock, because in the end it is supposed to be best because people compromise. Good on paper but in practice we are still waiting on the results from the first experiment.

[Dooz]

Ahh dangit congress

[Navyguy]

It's just because Congress can't decide what the funding should be. Just give the site a few days it will be back up.

[zekes]

At least Orbital and SpaceX will keep calm and carry on...

[deadshot462]

Ignorant move to close off the critical launch preparations. If MAVEN is delayed to 2016, the cost will be MUCH higher than if launch occurs as planned next month.

Also:

The CDC won't be able to support its annual seasonal influenza program that monitors the spread of the flu through U.S. states. Monitoring the spread of flu helps the agency direct vaccines to where they’re most needed.

Amazing job, Congress.

[Kerbin Dallas Multipass]

NASA down to 3% of workforce, NSA not affected (link)

The search for intelligence on planet earth has priority it seems:)

[Nibb31]

If you mean the system by which a small faction of one house of representatives can shut down the entire government without any means to e.g. promptly dismiss them, the human beings are the ones generally referred to as the 'founding fathers'.

One of the problems is that the US has the oldest constitution in the World. Other countries had democratic institutions around the same period (UK and France for example), but they have made changes to those rules of government on a regular basis. Some countries have experimented various systems and ideas and other countries have learned from those lessons to improve their own rule of law.

The US however is stuck with a system that was made in the 18th Century. The biggest fear that the founding fathers had in those days was monarchical tyranny, and a lot of the US Constitution is geared towards that, although it really isn't a risk at all nowadays. A majority of the population wasn't informed or educated on political matters, and people had to ride several days on a horse to reach a voting station or for ballot results to arrive in Washington DC. There have been amendments, but most of them are minor changes and the world is a totally different place as it was back then. New concepts and systems of government have emerged, yet the US Constitution is stuck with institutions that simply aren't fit for the 21st Century.